Hanizadeh's column is filled with inaccurate statements of fact, including:

1. The court ruling was based on UN Resolution 242, according to which the West Bank is considered part of occupied Palestinian territory.

That is false. 242 says nothing of the sort.

2. Resolution 242 states that Israel must unconditionally withdraw from the territories it occupied in 1967 and forbids border changes.

False again. Indeed, under 242 Israel is to withdraw from some of the territories captured in the Six Day War only when it is fully recognized in secure borders.

3. According to the Oslo Accords, which the Palestinian Liberation Organization under the leadership of Yasser Arafat and the Zionist regime signed in 1993, a Palestinian government should be established in the lands occupied in 1967.

Oslo never called for a withdrawal from all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Oslo I, signed in 1993, established the Palestinian Authority and called for it to take control over Jericho and most of Gaza. Oslo II, signed in 1995, called for Israeli withdrawal from the large cities in Judea and Samaria, and several other withdrawals, with final borders to be negotiated.

If you're still reading, a fair question would be why I'm focusing on a Tehran Times column. After all, that's not exactly anyone's idea of an objective paper.

The answer is that each of the three false myths quoted above has found its way into much of the mainstream European and North American media. The idea that Israel is required to unilaterally withdraw under UN Resolution 242 and Oslo is generally unchallenged and has become pervasive.